In the latest published data from the BLS it shows that the lowest 20% of earners saw their incomes before taxes jump 7.6%, to $10,174, in the 12 months ending June 2013. Ok..this seems strange, lets read on. It also states that the highest 20% earners meanwhile saw their incomes slip 1.4%, to $164,647. So, if I read this data correctly it means that what president Obama has been saying is happening is actually not happening? Poor people are starting to do better while those that are the "haves" are making less? This brings to mind two questions: (1) Is the economy doing better than we think it is? and (2) is this Income Inequality thing just politispeak for "vote for me".

The video above talks about Income Mobility as the forgotten factor in the so called "Wealth Inequality" problem in this country. Obviously there are those that have lots of money and those that have very little. However, if you acknowledge the fact that incomes do not remain static and admit that after tax incomes show much less of a gap due to government transfer payments....the gap is less of a chasm and more of a culvert.

I guess we need to take a long hard look at what these numbers mean.OK...I am done looking....I think they mean that those who have less money are starting to make more and those who have more are beginning to make less. If I had a Ph. D. I could have made that a lot more confusing...but I digress :)

The look on his face says it all, I want what you have! There is an equality myth in America. We believe that we want equality when in fact what we want is to have more than the guy next to us. So how does this work when it comes to salaries? I have three little letters for you: C E and O. That's right the current "I want what you have" debate is in how much we pay our CEO's in America

The Christian Science Monitor has an interesting article on this as it concerns ten companies with the largest difference between CEO compensation and "average worker" compensation. In a nutshell this article will give average pay amounts for the workers compared to the top executive for Best Buy, AT&T, Wal-Mart and others. What this article and many like it say is that top CEO's are making as much as 1795 times the pay the "average" worker is. This list from Bloomberg is interesting as well. It goes on to state that only the largest companies have this large disparity. And really isn't that how it should be.....pay for performance? Due to the public outrage, this then, of course, must be uncommon in other industries.If we look at professional sports we can see the same disparity. Lets talk Americas pastime.....lets talk Baseball!

Pay levels and revenue stats for the various levels of professional baseball

Single A

$850-1050 amonth

Revenue Varies

Double A

$1500 a month

Revenue Varies

Triple A

$2150 a month

Revenue Varies

Major League

400k yr minimum to as much as 25 million/yr

30 teams with a total revenue of 7 billion dollars.

On average, the top 20 teams, (A,AA,AAA) are worth $21.2 million and pulled in $9.8 million in revenue per team, of which 49% came from tickets (forbes.com)

So...what did we just learn here? The average low level baseball player will need to work a second job to get by. Sound familiar? We also learned that the BigBoppers like Justin Verlander and Ryan Howard earn over 3,500 times what the little guys do. Where is the outrage!?! Where are the protest marches to increase the rookie minimum for these guys! Someone call Al Sharpton.....does Al Sharpton even like baseball?

The reason we don't hear anything from the struggling players is because these guys are doing what they love.The reason we do not hear anything from the fans is just that....they are fans of these players making the big bucks and love paying big bucks to watch them work.

Buzzwords like pay gap and income inequality have become permanent fixtures of the modern lexicon. It is easy for us to project negative emotions towards what we do not understand, (CEO's of large multinational corporations). It is ,in turn, also easy for us to project positive emotions onto those professions we do understand. (athletes, rock stars and movie stars). We are not upset that CEO's make tons of money compared to the average worker.....we are upset that we don't make more money for all of our hard work.

They have low cost goods for the community to purchase.They provide jobs in the town they build a storeThey contribute a lot to the economy through property taxes.

How Wal-Mart is the bad guy

Those low cost goods come from China, where workers are not paid very muchThe so called "Wal-Mart effect" destroys mom and pop business in towns where they build a storeThey create low paying jobs which many claim contribute to the income inequality issue

The list above is very simple and not exhaustive. However, it does start the debate as to who is responsible for the well being of our countries workers. Is it corporations like Wal-Mart? Is it their responsibility to create high paying jobs? I would argue that those whom work at Wal-Mart as free to leave and go to a different place of employment I they are not happy with the wages. The contrarian viewpoint to this article is that those workers are stuck in low paying jobs where they have no chance for advancement. What is your opinion? Does Wal-Mart have a higher responsibility to its shareholders, customers or employees?

I was not sure that it could happen, but it did. It looks like Organized Labor is turning on Obamacare, (otherwise know as the Affordable Care Act). The group UNITE HERE has issued a report. I have embedded a copy of this report below for your convenience. In this report it states "the ACA threatens the middle class with higher premiums, loss of hours, and a shift to part-time work and less comprehensive coverage"

In addition this report goes on to state: Having already made efforts to accommodate businesses, churches and congressional staff, it is ironic that the Administration is now highlighting issues of economic inequality without acting to preserve health plans that have been achieving the goals of the ACA for decades. Without a smart fix, the ACA will heighten the inequality that the Administration seeks to reduce.We take seriously the promise that “if you like your health plan, you can keep it. Period.” UNITE HERE members like their health plans. UNITE HERE’s plans are ready to compete with the corporate giants of the health insurance industry if Washington will simply create a level playing field.

This report was sent to every union around the country as well as being sent to Capitol Hill. Looks like organized labor just declared war on the current administration

It has always been true that depending on how you "present" the information, is how it will be "received".This is nowhere more true than in the current debate on Income Inequality. According to Thomas Sowell, (in a 1999 speech), there are 39 million people in the bottom 20% and there are 64 million people in the top 20%. In 1999 numbers, a household with total income of $75,000.00 would be in the top 20 %. Another comment he makes in this interview, which I find interesting, is that movement is pretty fluid in between the quintiles,Now according to that which you hear in the media today, the rich are getting richer and the poor are staying poorer, but that is just massageing the numbers. According to a study Mr. Sowell references over an 8 year period in the late 90's more people had moved from the bottom 20% up to the top 20% than had stayed put.

Household income: Includes income of the householder and all other people 15 years and older in the household, whether or not they are related to the householder.Median: The point that divides the household income distribution into halves, one-half with income above the median and the other with income below the median. The median is based on the income distribution of all households, including those with no income.

Household Income stats showing a decline in the median Income level (click for a larger image)

So, we can already see that one way to make it seem there is a terrible "inequality" in income levels is to use household income instead of per capita income.Check out this chart from the State of Maryland:

As you can see Per Capita income, that is income for a single person, is not much less than median household income. If I want someone to ,say, think the world is unfair....I would use Household income data and neglect to mention differences in population.If, however, I want you to realize that the American dream is still alive.....I would tell you that after government transfer payments like food stamps, housing subsidies and Medicaid, the income gap is not that wide at all. If you can dream it.......you can do it.

Many people think that for one person to have more money someone else must have less. That is, that many people believe the rich are rich at the expense of the poor. This, however, is just not true. In the video below you will see Milton Friedman speak about how in the 19th century this was untrue. It is called the Robber Baron Myth. It is also untrue today.